Clark and the Gender Gap

Though I have backed Dean, I like Clark and think he would be a great nominee for president (or vice-president.) But I'm wondering about the significance of the gender gap. Several recent polls show Clark has stronger support among men than women, and I'm not sure why. Could it be because he entered the race late, and some women who are already committed to other candidates are perhaps less likely to change their selection? He's pro-choice and certainly seems committed to womens' equality. Do some men like the fact that he's a hunter and ex-military? Do looks play in with men - he is arguably the most attractive candidate, and appears distinguished and presidential - does that matter? And if so, why doesn't this factor in more with his appeal for women? Can we assume women will vote the Democratic ticket regardless of the nominee, but we need someone who especially appeals to men this time, since male voters have been Bush's strength? Or is it unwise to take womens' votes for granted - they have often provided the edge that gets Democrats elected. The swing voter is extremely important in a tight race. Any thoughts?

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000298.html

Is Clark Electable? Sure he is. DR’s still not sure he can get nominated (Dean’s clearly in the driver’s seat there), but evidence continues to mount that Clark could definitely beat Bush and is probably the Democrats’ best bet to do so.

Start with male voters. A little-noticed feature of Bush’s recent drop in approval ratings, reported by William Schneider in the October 4 National Journal, was the extent to which the drop was driven by a sharp decline in approval among men–17 points from August through late September, virtually erasing the gender gap in presidential approval. Now, it’s unlikely that the Democrats can translate all that male Bush disapproval into votes–a gender gap of some size is likely to remain–but a candidate who can consolidate a good chunk of these male voters will considerably boost his chances in the general election.

That candidate would appear to be Wesley Clark. We’ve already seen that Clark does very well among Democratic registered voters who are men. But he also does well among male registered voters in general. In a just-released Quinnipiac University poll of Pennsylvania voters, Clark is the only candidate who holds Bush under 50 percent (48 percent Bush to 43 percent Clark) in a prospective 2004 matchup. He does this by getting as much support as Dean among women (44 percent), but also receiving 42 percent support from men, in contrast to Dean’s 37 percent. As a result Dean runs much less well than Clark, losing to Bush 51 percent to 41 percent.

Or take independent voters. For a Democrat to win in 2004, he must run strongly among these voters. In a just-released Field Poll of California registered voters, Clark is the only candidate to beat Bush in a head-to-head matchup, 45 percent to 43 percent. He does this by doing about as well as the other candidates among Democrats, but also carrying independents by 18 points, 51 percent to 33 percent. In contrast, Dean carries independents by just 3 points and as a result loses to Bush, 46 percent to 42 percent. The other Democratic candidates do somewhat better, carrying independents by from 4 to 8 points, but also lose to Bush in their head-to-head matchups.

Too bad there’s that pesky nomination business.....

(Ruy Teixeira, who co-wrote "The Emerging Democratic Majority")

Oh my, He'll be great when the ladies get to know him.

That's why I mentioned it. DU - where people really care about facts over sensation - unfortunately is not the rule when it comes to American voters.

I also visited a group of unlikely voters over the weekend (very leftie, refuse to acnowledge the 2000 coup). They were down on all candidates but said they'd vote the nominee (ABB) and especially Clark - for being so handsome! (these are not shalllow people - and I didn't expect any positive reaction to my Clark button). So, there are variables polsters cannot measure.

is to close the Gender gap with women. Many women don't know Clark yet. Once they get their dose, they will want him nominated. It just a matter of time.

"You are going down."

I am not sure there is a gender gap in Clark's support. I think that you have to look at support levels "between" candidates, as well as "within" candidates. For example, you noted that Clark and Dean do equally well among women (i.e., 44%), but Clark does better among men. Apparently, therefore, there is not gender gap between Dean and Clark. My thoughts are rambling because I am trying to get this done before a meeting, but I just wanted to put these thoughts "out there" for discussion.

no text

Clark can have more support amongst men than women, but that doesn't necessarily mean he has less support amongst women than other candidates.

For instance, let's say these are the poll numbers for two candidates:


Candidate A -- 44% approval from women, 90% approval from men

Candidate B -- 44% approval from women, 44% approval from men


Candidate A has a "gender gap" between his male and female support, and more men prefer him than women. Candidate B has no "gender gap" and just as many women as men prefer him, but that doesn't mean more women support candidate B than would support candidate A.

That is what he meant by looking at the approval ratings not just between genders, but between candidates as well. Otherwise, the assertion that candidate A is getting less support from women (implied in comparison to other candidates) just because there's a "gender gap" would be false.



Edited for grammar, and to add the the paranthetical.

You are talking "approval ratings" - I was talking number of people saying they will vote for him (ie, % of registered Democrats.)

The actual NUMBERS OF MEN AND WOMEN saying they will vote for Clark out of the entire pool of voters is what I'm talking about. Significantly more men than women say they will vote for him. The difference in women are now giving their support to other candidates. Will they transfer support to Clark if he becomes the nominee? Using the Pennsylvania Clark matchups with Bush, the author seems to believe so. He also seems to think the more compelling issue is the need to draw in potential male voters in a head to head matchup with Bush.)

You might want to read "The Demographics of Clarkism"

http://www.emergingdemocraticmajorityweblog.com/donkeyrising/archives/000295.html

It's somewhat dated, and I'm not sure if there's a newer analysis that breaks down demographics, but as you can see, having a gender gap doesn't mean he gets less support from women that another candidate without a gender gap.


While Clark receives more support than Dean among both men and women, his margin over Dean among women is just 3 points (16 percent to 13 percent), but an impressive 12 points among men (29 percent to 17 percent).


Clark -- 16% support from women, 29% support from men, gender differnce of 13pts (noticeable gender gap)

Dean -- 13% support from women, 17% support from men, gender difference of 4pts (i.e, no significant gender gap)

Although Dean has no gender gap, Clark still has more female support than Dean.


Note: these numbers are from October, I don't know if anyone has done a demographical breakdown of any newer poll. And this was with a crowded field, not a head to head match up with Bush.

and Clark's numbers have dropped since then.

The question remains - why, among Clark's supporters, is it two to one men to women.

Men and women are roughly 50% each of the population.

What happens when Clark is the only candidate?

Perhaps, as the author thinks, things will approach 50-50.

But it's still a valid point - so my question still stands - why the difference in appeal?

Do you have any demographic breakdown of head to head matchups and recent data? I would really be interested.

The question remains - why, among Clark's supporters, is it two to one men to women.


Interesting question. I'm not sure. But the point the Javadu and I were trying to make was that just because Clark has a gendergap doesn't necessarily translate to him getting less support from female voters than another candidate (like Dean) would in a head to head matchup with Bush. They can have the same level of female support, with Clark just getting more male support on top of that -- thus creating the gender gap.

I am just asking what is a gender gap? Is it calculated by comparing the number of men and women who support a candidate? Or, is it calculated by comparing support of women and men between candidates? I think that the comparisons of candidates are more important than comparing support within the group of a single canididates supporters.

One way to look at it is that Clark has a 13pt gender because he gets more support from men than women. However, I find the candidate comparisons more interesting (and more important). For example, it may be that Dean has a 3pt gender gap because 3% fewer women to support him women who support Clark. Isn't the latter analyses more important than the former?

We were talking at cross purposes because of the confusion over the definition of "gender gap."

You make a valid point.

He gets the most votes or at least equals Clark in the number of votes, out of all the nine candidates, in all the recent national polls.

If Clark gets, for example, twice as many men as women

and Dean gets as many men as women

and Dean is getting as many or more overall votes as Clark

then Dean is getting more women.

Zogby 10/24:
Dean tops the list of nine Democratic hopefuls with 12%, followed by Clark with 10%, Kerry at 9% and Lieberman at 8%. Gephardt and former IL Senator Carol Mosley Braun are tied at 5%, ...

ABC/Washington Post 10/26:
Registered voters nationwide who are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents. "If the 2004 Democratic presidential primary or caucus in your state were being held today, and the candidates were , for whom would you vote?" Howard Dean 17%, Richard Gephardt 14%, Wesley Clark 14%, Joseph Lieberman 13%, John Kerry 8%, ...

...

Zogby 10/24:
Dean tops the list of nine Democratic hopefuls with 12%, followed by Clark with 10%, Kerry at 9% and Lieberman at 8%. Gephardt and former IL Senator Carol Mosley Braun are tied at 5%, ...

ABC/Washington Post 10/26:
Registered voters nationwide who are Democrats or Democratic-leaning independents. "If the 2004 Democratic presidential primary or caucus in your state were being held today, and the candidates were , for whom would you vote?" Howard Dean 17%, Richard Gephardt 14%, Wesley Clark 14%, Joseph Lieberman 13%, John Kerry 8%, ...


This is in reference to the primary voting population, while the discussion of the gender gap is in relation to the general voting population. Thus, it's possible for Dean to have more support in the primary, while Clark has more support in the general election, thus creating the gender gap with Clark and Dean having the same level of support amongst women.

Teixeira is trying to prove that whether Clark or Dean is the Dem. nominee, women will back the Dem. nominee.

That is a completely different ballgame than my question!!!

My question is why more men than women like Clark! The women are backing someone else (other Dem. candidates)!

I am talking about support among the Democratic candidates!

Dean is the frontrunner in all the national polls!

Therefore, he's got the most support!

That means more people want to vote for him than for Clark! And if you use the polls margin of error, then say Dean and Clark have the same number of support!

But it still means that

if Clark has more men than women supporting him, but he has less overall support than Dean,

and Dean has equal numbers of men and women,

then more women support Dean than Clark!

And again, more men support Clark than women!

I'm asking WHY!!!

of why more men than women support Clark.

But I also contend that it doesn't mean less women support Clark than support Dean -- I'm willing to be proven wrong on this.


But it still means that if Clark has more men than women supporting him, but he has less overall support than Dean, and Dean has equal numbers of men and women, then more women support Dean than Clark!


That statement's logic doesn't hold if you weave between populations.

Please see #46

That's a pretty clear population. And my logic holds perfectly well. I can PM you my credentials if you doubt I understand.

on edit - Thanks and glad we understand each other now.

Perhaps you can start a new thread with a clearer statement of the problem -- specifically indicating your reference to DEMOCRATIC WOMEN without any confusion over different voting populations.

I think I would be interested in the answers, too. And I don't doubt your credentials.

Apologies for the confusion that has resulted here.

No Text

if you mean Teixeira's Pennsylvania head to head Bush vs. Clark and Bush vs. Dean numbers among the Pennsylvania general population (including Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, Greens, etc.)

then no, as I said, TEIXEIRA is saying that is more important than MY question - I added his points for balance to my concern, and said as much (I respect his opinion)

MY question was about Clark's support among DEMOCRATIC WOMEN NOW (pre-Bush vs. Nominee matchup)

Hence Teixeira's sarcastic comment that Dean would get the nomination (because he has more Democratic support) but lose the election (because Clark has more support among the general population)

but I doubt it will hurt him in the general election. My concern about Clark is that he has spent his adult life in a very male dominated culture that has brushed aside allegations of sexual abuse by soldiers. I think Clark will have to have some very strong women on his staff, take some strong stands, and be outspoken to show that he understands the concerns of women. He has already made some of these statements, but he will have to take an agressive stance to prove it.

* gets away with his mysogeny because he has two daughters and high profile female advisors. If you don't pay much attention to politics, women think he is supportive of women. Clark will have to do the same with strong women advisors and then women will flock to him


Disclaimer: I like Clark. I am not bashing him just trying to discuss this because I do think he might have a problem unless he addresses this.

they'd drop him like a hot potato

The thing is, most voters are so woefully uninformed, and go by things like impressions (and swallow propaganda hook, line, and sinker.) Both men and women fell for that Bush "regular guy" routine.

Most Americans don't even vote. Are what's decided by voting even the will of the majority any more, or just the will of the people who bothered to actually show up?

at the bases under his command.

He also addressed the troops and their families' Health needs and Day Care.

Why the HECK he doesn't talk about this is beyond me.

Being a Base Commander is alot like being a Governor and Clark was definately more PRogressive than many of his colleagues.

Maybe that's one reason why some of the other Top Brass bad mouthed him.

based on my personal experience: my S.O. doesn't particularly like Clark. Just based on visceral reaction, not on any research or studying of his performances. A major problem for her is the military association. (She has become a big fan of Dean after watching his campaign for the last few months.)

Thanks for posting this. I would like to know more about how women in general feel about Clark and his campaign.

--Peter

Women are strongly impacted by health care issues, and for now I think Dean is perceived as making a stronger statement there.

I'm a woman, and I would prefer Clark. Give women time to learn more about him. Both are fine candidates, but I think Clark is more electable. If Clark is the candidate, I would hope Dean would endorse him and help provide support and visibility for health care concerns. Perhaps, as some speculate, Dean will be the VP (or Clark will be the VP), and it will be a moot point.

Women alone, households headed by women, older women...all of us are being extremely hard hit by the failure of health insurance. Women have more difficulty getting a job that offers health benefits, yet private health insurance is often much more expensive for us than for men and, in some areas, not obtainable at all.

and Clark on foreign policy?

They would make a great team, IMHO.

First, I'm not sure that you can say female support = domestic, male = foreign policy. It's not that clear cut. And from the "Demographics of Clarkism," Clark leads in both men and women. A gender gap doesn't necessarily mean he gets less support from women than Dean. That analysis is based on October data, but I don't know of any new poll that has detailed demographics breakdown.

"female support = domestic, male = foreign policy"

how you came by the conclusion of who was winning on what issue.

I'm trying to figure out the difference between his appeal toward men and women. I believe I and the other poster were trying to figure it out, and discussing possible reasons. None of us definitively reached a conclusion, it seems to me. I wasn't putting words in anyone's mouth, rather furthering the discussion with possible reasons.

Dean is the frontrunner in all the recent national polls - he has the most overall support (ie, the most numbers of Dems saying they will vote for him vs. any other candidate.) He also attracts men and women in equal numbers. Clark's numbers are significantly skewed toward men.

I just am wondering why. But since you seem to be arguing that there is no difference in support, then I guess we are at an impasse.

But since you seem to be arguing that there is no difference in support, then I guess we are at an impasse

From the article you linked at the very start of the thread:
He does this by getting as much support as Dean among women (44 percent), but also receiving 42 percent support from men, in contrast to Dean’s 37 percent.

It would indeed seem as if the gender gap was not cause by a lessening for female support, but by the same amount of female support between Clark and Dean.

I do think that your question of why more men support Clark than support Dean is interesting. Although the same amount of women support Clark as support Dean.

As for the Dean frontrunner status, I believe that is in reference to the primary voters. While the article you linked and the discussion of the gender gap is amongst the general voting public -- hence the seeming cofusion and contradiction.

Teixeira is trying to prove that whether Clark or Dean is the Dem. nominee, women will back the Dem. nominee.

That is a completely different ballgame than my question!!!

My question is why more men than women like Clark! The women are backing someone else (other Dem. candidates)!

I am talking about support among the Democratic candidates!

Dean is the frontrunner in all the national polls!

Therefore, he's got the most support!

That means more people want to vote for him than for Clark! And if you use the polls margin of error, then say Dean and Clark have the same number of support!

But it still means that

if Clark has more men than women supporting him, but he has less overall support than Dean,

and Dean has equal numbers of men and women,

then more women support Dean than Clark!

And again, more men support Clark than women!

I'm asking WHY!!!

Dean is the frontrunner in all the national polls!

This is in reference to the primary voting population, right? And not in head to head matchups with Bush.

That means more people want to vote for him than for Clark! And if you use the polls margin of error, then say Dean and Clark have the same number of support!
In the primary, yes.

1)if Clark has more men than women supporting him
This was taken from the head to head matchups of Clark or Dean vs. Bush, in the general voting population, right? Is there any evidence that more men than women support Clark in the primary voting population?

2)but he has less overall support than Dean,
In the primary voting population.

3)and Dean has equal numbers of men and women,
Are we talking about the general population, or primary, or both?

4)then more women support Dean than Clark!
Are you talking about more women in the primary voting population or the general?

#4 would only be correct if #1 to #3 are all referring to the same population. When it weaves back and forth between populations, the conclusion (#4) can't be made from those premises.


Edited to fix italics formatting

ME:

am concerned about DEMOCRATIC WOMEN IN THE PRIMARY - who they prefer among the candidates NOW - not in the Bush vs. Democratic nominee matchup

TEIXERA:

is concerned about ALL VOTERS IN THE GENERAL ELECTION vs. Bush

I added his numbers to provide balance to my concerns.

If there is any sentence you ponder over most, let it be this:
My concern is that Democratic women will vote for Clark as the nominee in the general election (ABB), but would rather have had Dean or Kerry or someone else be the nominee.

And my question is why? What are they seeing about Clark that I'm not - what is it that makes them prefer another candidate? I think he's an appealing candidate.

Sorry but that's as clear as I can get it.

If you STILL do not understand, perhaps we can take this offline.

I really did want the thoughts of other women as to why they might be leaning to someone besides Clark and if there was something about Clark they didn't like, because personally, I like him. This thread has instead been consumed by having to restate my question to you and another poster, over and over again.

As a woman, I want my views to be represented well by our nominee. I'm willing to settle to beat Bush if necessary. I think most Democratic women would go along with that. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't talk about it.

And my apologies for the confusion.

For the Democratic Party to run a candidate with a greater appeal to males than previously. It is good to force your enemy to contest a thing he has been used to taking for granted. Attempts by the enemy to shore up support among males may be relied on to offend a great number of women, and maintain the general Democratic advantage among them.

whatever gap exists is not between %s of men and women regarding clark, but rather that men like Clark better than they like other Democratic candidates at this point? If so, then doesn't that raise a very different question: why do men like Clark so much better than other candidates?

Let's put it another way -

When in a field of the nine candidates (not a Clark vs. Bush matchup, but rather, who of the nine candidates do you support)

looking at the resulting numbers for Clark, there is a higher percentage of men than women

You asked: "Could it be because he entered the race late, and some women who are already committed to other candidates are perhaps less likely to change their selection?"

That's a very different question than what I'm asking. If the %s are equal (men for Clark and women for Clark), then it's not that women react differently from men to Clark, particularly if women also like other Dems (e.g., Dean) about as much as they like Clark. It's that men react differently to Clark versus how they react to other candidates.

There's a static pool of voters.

Let's say an equal number of men and women.

If Clark gets twice as many men as women - then where are the other women? They have to be somewhere else.

So I'm not sure why you want to limit the question to men.

I included a link to the analysis by Teixeira where he feels that the head to head matchup is more important than Clark's support among Democrats (hence his sarcastic comment that Dean would get the nominee, but Clark would have a better chance to win.)

my question - there is a gap in support for Clark among Democratic women nationally who prefer Dean in greater numbers

his theory - in a head to head matchup of Clark vs. Bush or Dean vs. Bush among the general population (he is using Pennsylvania national numbers) women will support whoever is the Democratic nominee

You are mixing apples and oranges.

I'm talking about preference among Democratic voters - Dean has more support than Clark among women (in sheer numbers) - and among Clark's support, there is a significant gender gap.

Your reference (Teixeira) is preference among Democrats, Republicans, Greens, Independents, Libertarians, Military types of any persuasion, etc.

I would like to know the answer to my question about the preference of Democratic women.

If you want to know why more men in the general population don't like Dean (although he fares equally men/women among Democrats) then why not post that thread? And let me get the answers to my question here.

This is hopeless. See ya.

It's pretty simple.

My concern is Democratic women getting what they want.

Teixeira's concern is beating Bush.

I posted his numbers to offset my argument because I want to see both sides of the story. His is a valid concern. But women getting what they want is very imporant to me. I posted this thread to see what women thought about Clark - why they like him, why they don't - but I also think it's important to keep in mind that we need to put the person up there who has the best shot at beating Bush (hence I included Teixeira's analysis.)

they know it would be a terrible mistake to elect a general.

To me, he seems like a fair, decent, mature sort of person who stands for all the right things (that I'm aware of.) He'd be able to appeal to a wide range of people. He'd pick a similarly fair, decent, mature staff. This is my impression - as a woman. He's a general, yes. But he insists that force must be a last resort.

I just was so happy to read today of his support for the NEA

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29851-2003Oct28.html

and he gives me the heebee jeebees. Actually, I find him down right creepy.

When you add in all of the other negatives about this kinda, sorta, maybe democrat, there's nothing to like.

There is no record to examine his stance on women's issues, much less any other issues.

I will never understand why any Democrat would want to back a candidate that has NO DEMOCRATIC RECORD!

I don't want ANYONE wearing a uniform to be President.

The term "tight" would imply a close, personal relationship. Like they attend each others birthday parties...

Clark had a working association with some in the Administration and when speaking about their policies would preface his criticism with some diplomatic salutations.

Thanks for contributing to the steryotype and helping reinforce Rove's propoganda.

I support him, I think that he can definietly get the women's vote. :thumbsup: